|
on Environmental Economics |
| By: | Mandell, Svante (Dept. of Economics, Stockholm University) |
| Abstract: | This paper examines the optimal instrument choice to control emissions under uncertainty. A hybrid regulation mechanism is developed that contains cap-and-trade, emissions taxes and socalled safety valves as special cases. This makes it possible to examine optimal policy choice and the resulting efficiency losses for each instrument. It is shown that the hybrid regulation mechanism in efficiency terms is weakly superior to the other instruments. The model is also used to study optimal response to non-optimal policy implementations. |
| Keywords: | Emissions tax; Emissions trading; Safety valve; Ranking; Uncertainty |
| JEL: | H23 Q28 Q58 |
| Date: | 2004–11–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:sunrpe:2004_0017&r=env |
| By: | Alan Richards (University of California, Santa Cruz); Nirvikar Singh (University of California, Santa Cruz) |
| Abstract: | In this paper we argue that Indian water-dispute settlement mechanisms are ambiguous and opaque. We distinguish analytically between situations where cooperation is possible, and situations of pure conflict, where the initial allocation of rights is at stake. In the latter case, a search for a negotiated solution may be futile, and quick movement to arbitration or adjudication may be more efficient. However, in India, the process is slow, and effectively binding arbitration does not exist. The entanglement of inter-state water disputes with more general center- state conflicts and political issues compounds problems. We argue that these impacts can be reduced by a more efficient design of mechanisms for negotiating inter-state water disputes: some of the possibilities include a national water commission independent of daily political pressures, a federated structure incorporating river basin authorities and water user associations, and fixed time periods for negotiation and adjudication. |
| JEL: | O P |
| Date: | 2004–12–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0412010&r=env |
| By: | Centre for the Study of Living Standards |
| Abstract: | The purpose of this report is to shed light on the dynamics and determinants of productivity growth in nine selected natural resource industries and in the overall natural resource sector in Canada. This report provides a concise review of the findings of a detailed analysis undertaken by the Centre for the Study of Living Standards for Natural Resources Canada. The importance of productivity growth is reviewed, and observations are made on the contribution of natural resource industries to aggregate productivity growth; brief summaries on productivity and its determinants are presented for each of the nine industries; and the findings are synthesized into lessons for the natural resource sector as a whole. Some of the main findings are that: natural resource industries contribute disproportionately to aggregate productivity growth in Canada, with labour productivity levels twice as high as the total economy on average, and labour productivity growth one and one half times as rapid as total economy labour productivity growth; capital deepening is a key driver of labour productivity growth in natural resource industries, and high levels of capital intensity explain the high levels of labour productivity in natural resource industries; technological advance is another important driver of labour productivity growth in natural resource industries, and has also increased the importance of human capital; the earth sciences industries make a significant contribution to productivity growth in natural resource industries by providing innovative exploration and development services; and price trends play a large role in the productivity performance of many natural resource industries by determining the quality of deposit that is profitable to be exploited. |
| Keywords: | Forestry, Mining, Electricity, Oil and Gas, Oil, Gas, Paper Products, Wood Products, Coal Mining, Gold Mining, Diamond Mining, Forest Products, Earth Sciences, Geomatics, Productivity, Human Capital, Capital Intensity, Natural Resources, Exploration |
| JEL: | L71 L72 L73 O47 O51 J24 D24 O30 E62 |
| Date: | 2004–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sls:resrep:0406&r=env |
| By: | Eggert, Håkan (Department of Economics, School of Economics and Commercial Law, Göteborg University); Tveterås, Ragnar (Stavanger University) |
| Abstract: | Many EU fisheries have problems with depleted stocks and fleet overcapacity following from regulated open access regimes. Some EU countries have introduced Individual Vessel Quotas (IVQs), which can stop the race to catch and provide the fishers with incentives to minimize costs for a given catch. We model an IVQ fishery using a cost function approach and apply the methodology to the Swedish cod fishery in the Baltic Sea. We estimate a translog cost function for a data set of Swedish trawlers and assess the potential gains from a structural adjustment of the fleet. Results suggest potential cost savings of SEK 140 millions and a desirable fleet reduction of 25% for the Swedish Baltic Sea cod fishery. <p> |
| Keywords: | cost function; efficiency gains; individual vessel quotas; Swedish fisheries |
| JEL: | D24 Q22 |
| Date: | 2004–12–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hhs:gunwpe:0152&r=env |
| By: | JS Armstrong (The Wharton School - University of Pennsylvania) |
| Abstract: | Those making environmental decisions must not only characterize the present, they must also forecast the future. They must do so for at least two reasons. First, if a no-action alternative is pursued, they must consider whether current trends will be favorable or unfavorable in the future. Second, if an intervention is pursued instead, they must evaluate both its probable success given future trends and its impacts on the human and natural environment. Forecasting, by which I mean explicit processes for determining what is likely to happen in the future, can help address each of these areas. |
| Keywords: | forecasting, environment, decision making, environmental decision making |
| JEL: | A |
| Date: | 2004–12–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0412023&r=env |
| By: | Michael Kohlhaas; Katja Schumacher; Jochen Diekmann; Dieter Schumacher; Martin Cames |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp462&r=env |
| By: | Alan Richards (University of California, Santa Cruz); Nirvikar Singh (University of California, Santa Cruz) |
| Abstract: | The role of water has featured prominently in the Israeli-Palestinian negotiation process, and in Arab-Israeli disputes in general. The allocation or reallocation of water rights is a particularly thorny problem. Recent work (Fisher, 1995) seeks to sidestep the issue of rights allocation by appealing to the Coase theorem, which provides conditions under which the efficient use of a good does not depend on the allocation of property rights. It instead emphasizes the small use value of the water in dispute, and concludes that a trade of “water for peace” should be eminently possible. Here, we provide a critique of this conclusion, based on two central ideas. First, the conditions of the Coase theorem are not satisfied, even approximately, and therefore the valuation of the use of water cannot be analytically separated from the allocation of property rights. Second, the existence of subnational interests, and the need to have an agreement acceptable to important actors at this level, creates a further difficulty for negotiating a resolution of any dispute. Even if a trade at the national level can be agreed upon, domestic losers must be compensated enough to make it politically feasible for the national government. |
| JEL: | O P |
| Date: | 2004–12–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0412011&r=env |